[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] (OFFICE-3854) [graphic-properties] Proposal: different relative size relations
[ https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3854?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=37340#comment-37340 ] Michael Stahl commented on OFFICE-3854: --------------------------------------- forwarding a reply from Miklos Vajna: > You wrote in your proposal in part 1.1 RATIONAL > <q>Currently users can set a relative size (height or width), where 100% > always means the page text area. </q> > > I want to show, that this statement is wrong. Already in specification and > more in the current implementations in LibreOffice and AOO, the reference > base is not always the "page text area." Yes, sorry for the confusion. The emphasis is on that the current behavior is kind of a single relation, and the current proposal is about allowing multiple relations. In case the anchor is a plain paragraph, then this means the page text area (which doesn't include margins). > When it is intended, that the attribute value "paragraph" covers the already existing cases, then the wording > <q>* paragraph: 100% means the anchor paragraph text area </q> > is not precise enough. > > In addition the wording > <q>page: 100% means the entire page</q> > is missing the web layout case, when no page exists, but only a window. Thanks for noticing this. I would propose to ignore this property when in the web layout, just like how increasing e.g. the left page margin has no effect to the web layout, either. > Perhaps the description can use a table (similar to Table 17) to describe the reference base for the different cases. I think this will make sense to do if further, more complex relations are considered, but for the current proposal, I think we can avoid it, since the two cases just boil down to "existing behavior" vs "entire page". > Some further comments: > Currently the sections 19.509, 19.510.2, 20.331, and 20.332.1 contain > descriptions, how a percent value has to be interpreted. That parts have to > be adapted, when the new attribute "style:rel-width-rel" and > "style:rel-height-rel" will be introduced. Makes sense to me. > I think, the specification should define the value "paragraph" as default > for the case the attribute style:rel-width/height-rel is missing and value > "percent" is set for style:rel-width/height. Did you meant "when style:rel-width-rel/height-rel is missing and style:rel-width/height is set"? In that case, yes, I agree. The text already implicitly proposes that in case style:rel-with/height-rel is missing or it's specified, but the value is "paragraph", that is the same behavior; but marking it as default explicitly is OK with me. > [graphic-properties] Proposal: different relative size relations > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: OFFICE-3854 > URL: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3854 > Project: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Text > Affects Versions: ODF 1.2 > Environment: This is an enhancement, described in terms of changes to OpenDocument-v1.2 > Reporter: Thorsten Behrens > > Improve interoperability with other text processors, by enabling round-trip of additional graphic style properties. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.2.2#6258)
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]